(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.08.13 2015가단18354

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.08.13 2015가단18354

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the lessor did not have entered into a direct lease contract with the Defendant, and the Defendant asserts that the lessor would have prevented the lessor from getting out of the monthly rent under the lease contract to receive the top priority payment even with the knowledge that the lessor could not timely pay the bank interest at the time of the conclusion of the lease contract. The Plaintiff seeks correction of the distribution schedule like the purport

B. Determination 1) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, and 8 (including branch numbers), and the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, D shall be deemed as follows:

(2) The Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the lessor from December 1, 2010 to November 30, 2012 with respect to KRW 20 million, monthly rent, KRW 1.5 million, and the term of lease from December 1, 2010 to November 30, 2012; and thereafter, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with E under the broker of a licensed real estate agent G on February 15, 2013, with the broker of the licensed real estate agent, from February 15, 2013 to February 14, 2015. Upon the request of E, the Defendant remitted the deposit amount of KRW 20 million on the date of the contract, and operated the “H” upon delivery of the instant real estate, and the Defendant cannot be deemed to have entered into a legitimate lease agreement with the lessor, in light of the certificate of completion of subparagraph 1 (No.8).

In addition, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant is the most lessee who entered into a lease agreement with the aim of receiving the top priority repayment in the auction procedure on the instant real estate.

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2017.04.28 2015가단226945

-대구지방법원 2019.07.03 2018나319557

-의정부지방법원 2018.07.12 2018나200823

-의정부지방법원 2019.02.15 2018가단101932

-의정부지방법원 2017.06.30 2016가단32735